The High Court set aside a binding-over detention order, holding that the District Court lacked evidence to justify the bond conditions and continued custody.
Court of Appeal dismissed a habeas corpus appeal, holding the High Court should have addressed the legality of detention after acquittal, not the statute’s constitutionality.
The High Court erred by addressing the constitutionality of the Preventive Detention Act, which was not properly raised in the application. The application was solely for habeas corpus based on the legality of detention after acquittal, not the constitutionality of the Act. The appeal is dismissed as the original application did not challenge the Act's constitutionality.
The evidence established that both appellants were in possession of offensive weapons as defined by section 8(1) of the National Security Act 1970; the burden of proof was not discharged by the accused, and the convictions were proper.
The Court of Appeal upheld habeas corpus relief, holding that the Vice-President could act for the President, but the detention orders were invalid for lack of the Public Seal.